This book steers a middle course between two opposing conceptions that currently dominate the field of semantics, the logical and cognitive approaches. Patrick Duffley brings to light the inadequacies of both of these frameworks, arguing that linguistic semantics must be based on the linguistic sign itself and on the meaning that it conveys across the full range of its uses. The book offers 12 case studies that demonstrate the explanatory power of a sign-based semantics, dealing with topics such as complementation with aspectual and causative verbs, control and raising, wh- words, full-verb inversion, and existential-there constructions. It calls for a radical revision of the semantics/pragmatics interface, proposing that the dividing line be drawn between content that is linguistically encoded and content that is not encoded but still communicated. While traditional linguistic analysis often places meaning at the level of the sentence or construction, this volume argues that meaning belongs at the lower level of linguistic items, where the linguistic sign is stored in a stable, permanent, and direct relation with its meaning outside of any particular context. Building linguistic analysis from the ground up in this way provides it with a more solid foundation and increases its explanatory power.
This book steers a middle course between two opposing conceptions that currently dominate the field of semantics, the logical and cognitive approaches. Patrick Duffley brings to light the inadequacies of both of these frameworks, arguing that linguistic semantics must be based on the linguistic sign itself and on the meaning that it conveys across the full range of its uses. The book offers 12 case studies that demonstrate the explanatory power of a sign-based semantics, dealing with topics such as complementation with aspectual and causative verbs, control and raising, wh- words, full-verb inversion, and existential-there constructions. It calls for a radical revision of the semantics/pragmatics interface, proposing that the dividing line be drawn between content that is linguistically encoded and content that is not encoded but still communicated. While traditional linguistic analysis often places meaning at the level of the sentence or construction, this volume argues that meaning belongs at the lower level of linguistic items, where the linguistic sign is stored in a stable, permanent, and direct relation with its meaning outside of any particular context. Building linguistic analysis from the ground up in this way provides it with a more solid foundation and increases its explanatory power.
This monograph is part of a growing research agenda in which semantics and pragmatics not only complement the grammar, but replace it. The analysis is based on the assumption that human language is not primarily about form, but about form-meaning pairings. This runs counter to the autonomous-syntax postulate underlying Landau (2013)’s Control in Generative Grammar that form must be hived off from meaning and studied separately. Duffley shows control to depend on meaning in combination with inferences based on the nature of the events expressed by the matrix and complement, the matrix subject, the semantic relation between matrix and complement, and a number of other factors. The conclusions call for a reconsideration of Ariel (2010)’s distinction in Defining Pragmatics between semantics and pragmatics on the basis of cancelability: many control readings are not cancelable although they are pragmatically inferred. It is proposed that the line be drawn rather between what is linguistically expressed and what is not linguistically expressed but still communicated.
This is a series which aims to meet the need for books on modern English that are both up-to-date and authoritative. The texts are ideal for the scholar, the teacher, and the student, but especially for English speaking students in overseas universities where English is the language of instruction, or advanced specialist students of English in foreign universities. Although English is probably the most studied language in the world, this is one of the first systematic comparisons of infinitives with and without the use of "to". Patrick Duffley examines these uses adopting the semantic approach, which shows that the two infinitive forms each have a basic meaning which is capable of explaining all of their particular uses. The author has carried out detailed research for this book, examining over 24,000 occurences of the infinitive, as well as taking into account the observations of previous grammarians. The book challenges old assumptions that grammar is independent of meaning and should be dealt with in purely formal terms. It also fulfils a need for literature on an area of English grammar which has sometimes been presumed to be chaotic and unsystematic. The text is aimed specialists in linguistics and advanced students of English as a second language.
Louis and Mr. Walters are back! Presented in the form of a Socratic dialogue like its predecessor, The Return of the Grammar Guru aims to both instruct and entertain its readers through give-and-take conversations between the Grammar Guru, a retired linguistics professor who runs a pub near the university campus, and Louis, an aspiring English teacher with an insatiable thirst for grammatical knowledge and beer. Through a series of weekly encounters with the Guru, Louis learns about: •The difference between the infinitive and the gerund, as in He tried to be nice to his boss and He tried being nice to his boss. •The use of the article in English, which can make the difference between He admired Picasso and He admired the Picasso. •The difference between Didn’t you bring any beer? and Didn’t you bring some beer? •The contrast between bare noun and genitive constructions, as in Someone stole our car tires and Someone stole our car’s tires. •The use of the demonstratives in There was this guy walking down the street and There was that guy walking down the street. •The effect of adverb position on meaning, as illustrated by the difference between She shared her experience generously and She generously shared her experience. •The subtle difference between With no job Rob would be happy and With no job would Rob be happy. Rather than overwhelm his listener with endless rules, the Guru makes grammar come to life by focusing on the meaning of the various grammatical forms. Also included in the book is a series of meaning-based exercises that allow readers to test their knowledge of the forms discussed in the book.
Written in the form of a Socratic dialogue, the Grammar Guru is the first Grammar book written to instruct and entertain its readers – yes … entertain! Hirtle Walters, a.k.a. the Grammar Guru, is a retired linguistics professor who runs a pub-style restaurant not far from his former university campus. Louis Bonenfant is an English Studies student and aspiring English teacher who one day seeks out the Guru’s help. Through a series of weekly encounters with the Guru, Louis learns the difference between: A verb’s state and action use. The simple and progressive form as seen in sentences like I take three pills a day and I’m taking three pills a day or I like university and I’m liking university. The simple past and present perfect form as in I lost my assignment and I’ve lost my assignment. The present perfect and present perfect progressive form as in Your python has escaped and Your python has been escaping. The modals can, could, may, might, will, shall, etc. A real and an unreal condition. Rather than inundate Louis with confusing rules and lifeless examples, the Guru instructs Louis on the meaning underlying the various grammatical forms. Through their encounters, Louis comes to the realization that the Guru’s meaning-based approach to teaching grammar and jocular character makes learning it much more rewarding and even fun. Also included in the book are a series of meaning-based exercises.
« In a world where the word ‘gender’ has undergone an explosion of meaning originating in a proliferation of new pronouns, Lori Morris’ study of grammatical gender in English constitutes a much-needed reminder to linguists of the necessity of distinguishing between linguistically signified meaning and reference. » -Patrick Duffley
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.